We're Back To The Beginning

[Terrel L. Shields]

Only an idiot actually thinks USPAP compliance significantly undermines the ability of an appraiser to compete with a non-appraiser on an eval assignment

??? Evaluations cost a fraction of appraisals. Any appraiser in my state must comply with USPAP when preparing a report below the de minimus period. No exceptions. The evaluator can be the village idiot, needs no license nor e & o insurance. AI is pushing for an eval standard lower than USPAP. So call me an idiot, but clearly I cannot compete with evaluators in an area where 95% of the commercial and residential property is below de minimus levels. We have banks who make hundreds of loans without using a single appraiser. They make only smaller loans.

 

[George Hatch]

Why do evals cost a fraction? Because appraisers won't work for the fees that go with those assignments, not because complying with USPAP takes more time/effort.

We've been over this a hundred times and you still don't get it. If a given SOW is acceptable for a client to use then it doesn't matter if it's an appraiser who does that or a non-appraiser. The difference in reporting is 95% fire-n-forget boilerplate that you set up once. And the appraisers have the *advantage* of having the additional skills and experience to do that research and analyses more quickly/efficiently. They just don't want to work for $25/hr the way these brokers will.

Now since I know you always bring up how stupid your state board is when it comes to understanding USPAP I'll just repeat the same thing I always say - If your state board members are idiots about USPAP that's an individual competency problem with those individuals; not an impediment that USPAP is creating.

If they knew WTH they were doing they wouldn't be doing some of these things.

 

[J Grant]

Whether appraisers think a volatile fee environment is sustainable or not is immaterial. It's the same thing as the farmers who have to deal with pricing volatility in their markets - their preferences are irrelevant.

As for appraisers funding the legal team it would take to force the lenders to pay C&R, a little "what if"
arithmetic should be all it takes to dispel that idea. There aren't enough appraisers out there to buy the politicians it would take to make that happen.

Not hire attorneys to battle for C and R, find one good atty file a class action suit for the lost $ siphoned off all these years. Might happen. Class action lawyers work on a contingency basis.

This administration is not consumer protection or regulation friendly, another one might be. Will see. Comparing million dollar crops on exchanges with appraisal fee dinky volatility resulting from predatory AMC tactics ...

Since you made the comparison, commodities or farm crops often get bid UP on the market, and thus their volatility can lead to profit and higher prices...but appraisal fees ALWAYS get bid down and always the winner is the lower price. The comparison has a flawed logic .

A farmer or commodities investor might take losses, but they can also win big and put up with volatility because of it. But that never happens with appraisers and AMC fee bidding because the "winner" is virtually always lower $ bid. Fees never get bid up, as they might in open markets. One of the reasons the tactics AMC's use to depress fees might be ripe for a class action suit.

 

[George Hatch]

You don't seem to be grasping the point that it is the lenders who will fight you on C&R, not the AMCs. At most the AMCs are nothing but cannon fodder in this fight. Those AMCs don't care how much you get paid; they only care about retaining their clients and getting their end. You're talking about taking on the big box lenders, the same ones that are still ticking even after taking fines that start with a B, not an M. You think the type of legal team it would take to go toe-to-toe with the lenders' legal teams will work on spec?

Besides, it was the feds who issued the final rule on C&R, not the lenders or the AMCs. All they're doing is adhering to the official interpretation of those regulations. You've got no case. There is no windfall to recover nor punitive fine from which to garner a percentage.

 

[Michigan CG]

This administration is not consumer protection or regulation friendly, another one might be.

The Obama administration put how many bankers in jail after the recession?

 

[J Grant]

I'm not talking bout fighting the lenders about C and R, I 'm talking about an on contingency basis ( free) class action lawyer if they see grounds of malfeasance to recover lost $ damages for past years to appraisers.

 

[J Grant]

The Obama administration put how many bankers in jail after the recession?

I am also angry about that. But he also passed regulation for consumer protection and that kept appraisals in the mix .

 

[George Hatch]

I'm not talking bout fighting the lenders about C and R, I 'm talking about an on contingency basis ( free) class action lawyer if they see grounds of malfeasance to recover lost $ damages for past years to appraisers.

What damages? What did either the lenders or the AMCs do to appraisers that was illegal?

 

[J Grant]

Not going to discuss it here, just wanted to mention it a lawyer looks at things differently...anyway it is a bit off the topic

 

[George Hatch]

Not going to discuss it here, just wanted to mention it a lawyer looks at things differently...anyway it is a bit off the topic

Suit yourself. I'll be interested to see what such an argument would look like, but I can wait. It should only take 4 or 5 years for such a case to work its way through the courts. I'll probably still be appraising by then. If I don't pass on to the next life during the interim.